Delayed Differentiation in Fertilizer Production: Deciphering Climate-Smart Miscible Products through Reverse Blending for Boosting Crop Production

Abstract

Generalized crop-specific or regional blanket fertilizer recommendations are among the primary dilemmas for sustainable agriculture resulting in low fertilizer use efficiency, nutritional imbalance in crops, while raising economic and environmental concerns. Innovative fertilizer formulations with balanced nutrient ratios customized to the crop requirements with temporal release properties are needed to make sustainable agriculture practically possible. For an example, the demonstration of the advantages of delayed differentiation, through reverse blending (RB) in small blending units at the end user level may be useful to increase the sustainability of agriculture. This review discusses how to use innovative fertilizer procedures in the fertilizer supply chain to optimize the supply of crop nutrition to boost crop production and safeguard the environment from the drawbacks of blanket fertilizer applications. This review also aims to identify critical elements that influence fertilizer use efficiency and fertilizer customization to improve fertilizer recommendations for future (precision) agriculture, and to assess the role and suitability of RB in the production of customized fertilizers. We reviewed typical case studies and summarized the role of delayed differentiation in the production of field fertilizers through RB. Customized fertilizers could be produced by using smallest sets of canonical basic inputs (CBI). CBI acronym offers the smallest set of chemical composite materials that can be used as a blending input for the production of customized fertilizers. Reverse blending (RB) accelerates the attainment of large flows by decreasing those flows to discover chemically stable reactions for the creation of novel fertilizer formulations. RB drives the high flow massification to low by managing the flow from 100 to 1.57%. RB requires a minimum of 10–15 CBIs (± 0.05%) to meet out nutritional requirements of many crops. Delayed differentiation through RB will involve exploration of known percentage of CBI in terms of N, P, K, Zn, B2O3, and filler to achieve a desirable fertilizer. The tailored fertilizers used for basal application must be granular, with at least 90% of the content ranging between 1 and 4-mm IS sieve, with no more than 5% lying below 1 mm. Moisture content should not be present at more than 1.5%. The paper demonstrates RB as a quadratic model approach where blending is based on geographical area, enabling the crops to achieve target yields through customized fertilizer solution with higher agronomic (kg/ha of N, P, K, Zn, B2O3) applicability. We understand that innovative fertilizer strategies must be developed to significantly reduce unforeseen negative effects on the environment and human health caused by the improper use of fertilizers.

Full text

Vol.:(0123456789)
1 3
Journal of Soil Science and Plant Nutrition
https://doi.org/10.1007/s42729-022-01055-9
REVIEW
Delayed Differentiation inFertilizer Production:
DecipheringClimate‑Smart Miscible Products throughReverse
Blending forBoosting Crop Production
TahirSheikh1 · ZahoorBaba2· ZahoorA.Ganie3· BasharatHamid2· AliMohdYatoo4· AnsarulHaq5· SadafIqbal1·
FehimJ.Wani6· SivagamyKannan7· RoheelaAhmad8
Received: 3 December 2021 / Accepted: 2 November 2022
© The Author(s) under exclusive licence to Sociedad Chilena de la Ciencia del Suelo 2022
Abstract
Generalized crop-specific or regional blanket fertilizer recommendations are among the primary dilemmas for sustainable agri-
culture resulting in low fertilizer use efficiency, nutritional imbalance in crops, while raising economic and environmental con-
cerns. Innovative fertilizer formulations with balanced nutrient ratios customized to the crop requirements with temporal release
properties are needed to make sustainable agriculture practically possible. For an example, the demonstration of the advantages
of delayed differentiation, through reverse blending (RB) in small blending units at the end user level may be useful to increase
the sustainability of agriculture. This review discusses how to use innovative fertilizer procedures in the fertilizer supply chain
to optimize the supply of crop nutrition to boost crop production and safeguard the environment from the drawbacks of blanket
fertilizer applications. This review also aims to identify critical elements that influence fertilizer use efficiency and fertilizer cus-
tomization to improve fertilizer recommendations for future (precision) agriculture, and to assess the role and suitability of RB in
the production of customized fertilizers. We reviewed typical case studies and summarized the role of delayed differentiation in
the production of field fertilizers through RB. Customized fertilizers could be produced by using smallest sets of canonical basic
inputs (CBI). CBI acronym offers the smallest set of chemical composite materials that can be used as a blending input for the
production of customized fertilizers. Reverse blending (RB) accelerates the attainment of large flows by decreasing those flows to
discover chemically stable reactions for the creation of novel fertilizer formulations. RB drives the high flow massification to low
by managing the flow from 100 to 1.57%. RB requires a minimum of 10–15 CBIs (± 0.05%) to meet out nutritional requirements
of many crops. Delayed differentiation through RB will involve exploration of known percentage of CBI in terms of N, P, K, Zn,
B2O3, and filler to achieve a desirable fertilizer. The tailored fertilizers used for basal application must be granular, with at least
90% of the content ranging between 1 and 4-mm IS sieve, with no more than 5% lying below 1mm. Moisture content should not
be present at more than 1.5%. The paper demonstrates RB as a quadratic model approach where blending is based on geographical
area, enabling the crops to achieve target yields through customized fertilizer solution with higher agronomic (kg/ha of N, P, K,
Zn, B2O3) applicability. We understand that innovative fertilizer strategies must be developed to significantly reduce unforeseen
negative effects on the environment and human health caused by the improper use of fertilizers.
Keywords Fertilizer· Mass customization· Quadratic programming· Reverse blending· Target yield
1 Introduction
Global population is expected to reach approximately
roughly 9.7 billion people in the 2060s (Nations 2019; Bar-
rett 2021), an increase of one-quarter of today’s 7.8 billion
(Vollset etal. 2020; Randive etal. 2021). A golden revolu-
tion in agriculture is now required to feed the future popula-
tion and match the ever-expanding food demands (Evans and
Lawson 2020; Siddaramappa 2021). Global food production
has to expand by 70% from 2010 to 2060 with focus on
the doubling of production in developing countries (Ten-
korang 2006). It is well documented that huge gaps exist
between the potential productivity or productivity under
research trials compared to the productivity under farmer
fields; however, it is more severe under the developing
* Tahir Sheikh
tahirkmr@gmail.com
Extended author information available on the last page of the article

Journal of Soil Science and Plant Nutrition
1 3
countries (George 2014). A gap between prospective output
and farmers’ produce is caused by a set of several biotic
including all types of pests and/or abiotic factors which
could be listed edaphic, environmental, and management
categories (Fischer etal. 2014; Dehkordi etal. 2020; Fischer
etal. 2014; Ortiz-Bobea etal. 2020; Xiang etal. 2020; Srini-
vasarao 2021). Among the edaphic factors, crop nutrition is
the basis of agricultural production, effective fertilizer use
is essential to raising agricultural productivity and indis-
pensable in achieving global food security. Global demand
for primary nutrients is expected to reach 200.91 million
tonnes by 2022–2023 (Fig.1), implying a 0.7% average
annual growth rate, resulting in a greater reliance on ferti-
lizer inputs (Dawson and Hilton 2011; Randive etal. 2021).
Fertilizer statistic of 2020–2021 indicates that the global
consumption of nutrients has touched 104.87 million tonnes
(108.74 mt (N), 47.42 mt (P2O5), and 38.71 mt (K2O)) with
continuously increasing projections for future (Fig.2). The
global fertilizer market was worth $155.8 billion in 2019,
with a continuous annual growth rate of 3.8% predicted for
the forecast period of 2019–2024 (Williams 2019). To close
this gap between the nutrient supply from organic sources
and the nutrient demand for optimal crop development, fer-
tilizer must be available in sufficient quantities. A transition
from blanket fertilizers to customized fertilizers is needed
to boost crop yields by better synchronizing the supply
and uptake of nutrients (Vidyashree and Arthanari 2021).
Manycountriesareactivelyinvolvedinformulatingpoli-
ciestohelpthefertilizerindustryin ordertoachieveferti-
lizerself-sufficiency (Randive etal. 2021). Hundreds of dis-
tinct customized fertilizers, far more than what is currently
available, are required for efficient and sustainable farming
(Gennari etal. 2019; Qaim 2020). Bridging up a balance in
production and demand, fertilizer industry is facing severe
problem, making it unable to overcome its current produc-
tion processing technology (Evans and Lawson 2020; Mah-
mah and Amar 2021). Optimal soil nutrient concentrations
are required to boost the crop yields withmaximumnutrient
use efficiency. Such a wide range of nutrient inputs cannot be
generated satisfactorily using conventional fertilizer produc-
tion methods based on continuous pooling batches (Verma
and Singh 2019; Chaudhari etal. 2020). This demands the
use of customized fertilizers that adhere to formulas with
wide range of nutrients and quantities depending on the
pedological conditions of regional agricultural soils and
requirementsof the crop (Incrocci etal. 2017). Mass cus-
tomization has scope even under discreet production process
in assembly lines, allowing production of multiple products
in a row (Stewart and Roberts 2012; Fuglie etal. 2019; Papa-
dopoulos 2020; Sanchez 2020). The review proposes a new
technique of fertilizer production based on the chemical
identification of a small inputs. This method uses a delayed
differentiation approach, in which blending of inputs takes
place in small blending units but rather in the farmer’s area,
in order to simplify fertilizer production and distribution
(Benhamou etal. 2020). It is an innovative strategy where
fertilizer plants need to produce only few intermediate prod-
ucts instead of generating all the fertilizers required by the
farmers. These intermediated are then combined in small
processing units close to end users. This novel approach is
termed as reverse blending (RB), which uses parameterized
quadratic program to specify the ideal requirement of sev-
eral primary inputs that are attempted to keep at minimum
level. RB helps to produce range of fertilizers by blending
the minimum inputs. As a result, the goal of the RB is to
find out the best input composition to meet out the demand
of any crop. RB operates via a single-stage blending method
as opposed to the traditional multistage pooling process. The
Fig. 1 Global demand for nitrogen, phosphorus and potassium ferti-
lizer by nutrients (NPK), 2016–2017 to 2022–2023 (million metric
tons)
2021-22 2023-24
0
20
40
60
80
100
120
NK2OP2O5 TOTAL
)sennotcirtemnoilliM(muissatoP,negortiN
Phophorus, Total (Million metric tonnes)
0
50
100
150
200
Fig. 2 Global nitrogen, phosphorus, potassium, and total nutrient (N,
P2O5, K2O) consumption during 2021–2022 and projection for 2023–
2024

Journal of Soil Science and Plant Nutrition
1 3
aim of RB is to determine optimal quantities of nutritious
composite material (inputs) with known percentage in pursu-
ance of getting more formulations (outputs) (Srichaipanya
etal. 2014). These new blended products accredit the diverse
production of customized products. This section discusses
how to use innovative fertilizer procedures in fertilizer sup-
ply chain to optimize the supply of crop nutrition to boost
crop production and safeguard the environment from blan-
ket fertilizer applications. This review also aims to identify
critical elements that influence fertilizer-use efficiency and
fertilizer customization to improve fertilizer recommenda-
tions for future (precision) agriculture.
2 Fertilizer Use Eciency andCrop Yields
Excessive fertilizer inputs contribute little to increased
crop productivity (Mikula etal. 2020), but they can lead to
excessive water use, fertilizer pollution, and environmental
concerns (Wang etal. 2016; Ren etal. 2021). Long-term
excessive fertilizer application, particularly nitrogenous (N)
fertilizer, can have a considerable impact on the majority
of soil biology by altering soil pH (Ren Wang etal. 2020).
Currently, blanket recommendations are given throughout
agro-ecological regions, despite the fact that fertilizer usage
and nutrient response intensity by crop are spatially hetero-
geneous (Ichami etal. 2019). On an average blanket fertilizer
recommendations of 171kg NPK ha−1 (111kgN ha−1, 44kg
P2O5 ha−1, and 16kg K2O ha−1) for various field crops have
caused poor nutrient supply with low nutrient use efficiency,
leading to limited crop yield responses (Fig.3) (Choudhary
etal. 2020; Ritchie 2021), while increasing emission of
greenhouse gases from agriculture fields (Yao etal. 2012;
Zhong etal. 2016).
In the production of cereals as a whole, the partial factor
productivity of nitrogen (PFPN) has declined from 245kg
grain/kg N applied in 1961–1965 to 52kg/kg in 1981–85,
and is currently about 44kg/kg N (Panayotova and Kosta-
dinova 2015). Most agricultural crops recover 20 to 30% of
applied P during their growth under ideal conditions (Collins
etal. 2016). The most prevalent recovery efficiency of phos-
phorus (REP) values (which account for 50% of all data) fell
within the range of 0.10 to 0.35kg/kg, which is likely repre-
sentative of most agricultural land worldwide. The average
recovery efficiency of potassium (REK) varied between 0.4
and 0.5kg/kg K. REK occurs frequently in the field on soils
with poor K fixing potential, good management (high yield),
and relatively low K rates (Qiu etal. 2014).
Subsequently, excessive fertilizer application hinders the
sustainable use of fertilizer supplies and raises the vulner-
ability of environmental degradation, such as NO3 toxicity,
ammonia volatilization, leaching of N and P into groundwater,
and N2O emissions via microbial denitrification (Zhong etal.
2016; Lian etal. 2017). Nitrate–N can readily leach down
below the rhizosphere and readily reaches to ground water,
causing contamination of precious water resources. Glob-
ally croplands make 60% of the area with increased levels of
nitrate–N pollution. The injudicious application of fertilizers
may enhance pollution to ecosystem either by nitrate accumu-
lation in water bodies or nitrous oxide in atmosphere (Fig.4).
The theoretical link between nutrient supply and uptake
can be subdivided into three distinct regions (Fig.5). In the
first zone (I), the absorption of nutrients is linearly propor-
tional to nutrient supply. Increases in supply do not result in
increased nutrient uptake after nutrient supply levels have
reached a certain threshold (zone II). When the latter occurs,
the other nutrient may be the limiting factor in crop yield.
In the intermediate range of nutrient supply, a nonlinear
behavior is evident (zone III). For zone III, it is assumed
that the demand and supply curves (III) are parabolic (Sattari
etal. 2014). Excess fertilizers have low agronomic efficiency
(Salim and Raza 2020), while as higher environmental and
human health implications (Dimkpa etal. 2020). Optimizing
fertilizer recommendation for farmers is critical for boosting
food production in agricultural landscapes.
Fifty percent of nitrogenous fertilizers used by plants are
lost to evaporation (Wang etal. 2016), another 15 to 25%
react with organic compounds in clayey soil and interfere
with soil colloids and reach to ground water (Putra etal.
14
11
8
7
5.5
4.7
4
2.8
1980-85
1985-90
1990-95
1995-00
2000-05
2005-10
2010-15
2015-20
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
14
16
KPNgK/niarggK
Kg grain/ Kg NPK
Fig. 3 Relationship between the efficiency of nutrient input (NPK)
application and yield response in intensive agriculture, illustrat-
ing constrained crop development and productivity beyond the opti-
mum nutrient supply. Average blanket fertilizer recommendations of
171kg NPK ha−1 (111kg N ha−1, 44kg P2O5 ha−1, and 16kg K2O
ha−1) for various field crops have caused poor nutrient supply with
low nutrient use efficiency, leading to limited crop yield responses

Journal of Soil Science and Plant Nutrition
1 3
2020). Volatilization of NH3 is a potential side effect of
using ammonium fertilizers, and this leads to a wide range
of soil and environmental pollutions (Sigurdarson etal.
2018). Nitrogen fertilizer efficiency is only between 30 and
40% in rice and 50 and 60% in other cereal crops (Bijay
andSingh2017). Phosphorus (P) concentration ranges
from 0.1 in soil solution to 100mg P L−1 in xylem sap and
approximately 4000mg P kg−1 in seeds (Linhart etal. 2019;
Ojeda Rivera etal. 2022). More than half of the 33 million
metric tonnes P year−1 that is released into the oceans is
transported by rivers, while the remaining runoff comes from
the coasts (Nyffeler etal. 2018). In most crops, phosphorus
use efficiency ranges from 15 to 20% (Etesami 2020), while
potassium use efficiency ranges from 60 to 80% (Ichami
etal. 2019). Depletion of soil phosphorus (P) by agricultural
practices is a major constraint on future food and feed supply
(Nziguheba etal. 2016)). Total yearly phosphorus (P) losses
from arable soils due to water erosion are estimated to be 6.3
teragram (Tg), with 1.5 Tg being organic P and 4.8 Tg being
inorganic P (Alewell etal. 2020b). Agricultural soils loose
phosphorus between 4 and 19kg ha−1 year−1, with the great-
est losses occurring because of water erosion. Worldwide,
water erosion results in an annual loss of 5.9 ± 0.79kg of
phosphorus per hectare from the top 30cm of arable land
(Smil 2000; Alewell etal. 2020a). Predictions for the global
demand for phosphorus in 2050 range from 22 to 27 million
tons per year, with an additional need of 4 to 12 million
tons per year for grasslands (Mogollón etal. 2018). Low
use efficiency of water-soluble P fertilizers has detrimental
impacts on ecosystems and human health (Fig.6). However,
Fig. 4 Delayed differentiation through reverse blending for crop specific nutrients through customized fertilizers could increase nutrient use effi-
ciency with comparably minimum fertilizer pollution
Fig. 5 Actual nutrient (NPK) uptake versus supply sub-divided into
three zones (I, II, and III) for most of the crops at a various propor-
tions of N (138, 150, 196), P (26, 30, 20), and K (31,90, 40) kgha.−1
(A. Dobermann et al. 2002; Haefele et al. 2003; Wortmann et al.
2009)

Journal of Soil Science and Plant Nutrition
1 3
erosional P losses account for a far lesser share of all P
losses from agricultural systems in Europe (16%) and Aus-
tralia (19%), ranging from 30 to 85% (Belayneh etal. 2019).
South Africa, Madagascar, and Tanzania, as well as Bolivia
in South America, are predicted to experience a very high P
loss of 10–20 kgha−1 year−1, while as India, Angola, Zam-
bia, and Uruguay in Southern Africa are predicted to experi-
ence a P loss of 5 to 10kg ha−1 year−1 (Alewell etal. 2020b).
Phosphorus deficiency can be remedied by using fertilizer
high in phosphorus (Pi). Rock Pi is the primary source of
Pi, which can only be mined from a very few locations in
the world. Phosphorus is primarily a nonrenewable resource
and 85% of the world’s remaining supplies are held by just
one country, Morocco (Edixhoven etal. 2014; Kisinyo and
Opala 2020). Phosphate fertilizer accounts for over 80% of
the annual demand for phosphate rock (PR) ore. Exploitable
deposits of PR may last 300–400years or beyond at cur-
rent production level of 160–170 million tones year−1years
(Dawson and Hilton 2011; Jupp etal. 2021). Since, geo-
logical deposits of phosphorus cannot be increased and
phosphorus resourceswill become more scarce globally in
the future (Scholz and Wellmer 2013; Roberts and Johnston
2015). Field studies demonstrate that P recovery by the crop
during the same year of application seldom surpasses 25%
and more commonly is only between 10 and 15% of the
P applied (Fig.6), which has led to the widespread belief
that excess P fertilizer use is extremely wasteful (Syers etal.
2008; Roberts and Johnston 2015). Agronomic field trials
have revealed that the P not taken up by the crops (i.e., the
residual P) is not reversible deposit in the soil and remains
in an inaccessible form, challenging previous beliefs (Jupp
etal. 2021).
To measure the recovery efficiency of P by crop, the
below given formula is widely used to determine phosphorus
recovery efficiency (Cassman etal. 1998) as (1)
where UP − U0 are the P taken up by a crop from soils
with (UP) and without (U0) added P and FP is the amount
of P applied through fertilizer, and the result expressed in
percentage.
Insufficient potassium (K) utilization in agricultural
production systems has reduced soil K storage (Philp etal.
2021). Nearly all of the world’s potash fertilizer comes
from MOP mined from sylvinite, carnallitite, or hartsalz
(Sweeting etal. 2020; Mikkelsen and Roberts 2021). K
fertilizers are applied to various crops at a far lower rate
than N and P fertilizers (Table1), and less than half of the
K lost by crops is typically restored annually (Majumdar
etal. 2021). The four forms of potassium found in soils
are unavailable K, accessible or fixed K, fast accessible or
exchangeable K, and water-soluble K (Berde etal. 2021).
The amount of potassium lost through leaching varies with
soil texture, pH, and the availability of potassium in the
soil (Sipert etal. 2020). K leaching from the soil system
does not have as severe an effect on the environment as of
N and P leaching, but it still can result in economic loss
and wasted agricultural inputs. Sustainable agriculture
requires a commitment to agricultural K-management that
can be sustained over time (Basak etal. 2022). Utilizing
slow-release K fertilizers, mineral adsorbents like clinop-
tilolite zeolite (CZ), or organic additives like composts
can all aid in K retention (Zargar Shooshtari etal. 2020;
Saleem etal. 2021; Sonali etal. 2022).
Precision fertilization, which accounts for soil condi-
tions affecting phosphate availability to plants and applies
fertilizer precisely when it is needed most through custom-
ized fertilizers (Raj etal. 2021). Customized fertilizers is a
(1)
Recovery ef f iciency%
(RE)=
U
p
−U
0
F
p
Fig. 6 Relationship of high
phosphorus input with soil solu-
tion P, microbial P, and losses to
water bodies

Journal of Soil Science and Plant Nutrition
1 3
pre-eminent option to solve the problem of inefficient ferti-
lizer-use efficiencyand gratifies crop nutritional demands
specific to an area, soil, and growth stage of plant (Vid-
yashree and Arthanari 2021). In countries with no avail-
able specific fertilizer recommendations from the Interna-
tionalFertilizerAssociation (IFA) database (Ramankutty
etal. 2008; Potter Philip etal. 2021), a spatial pattern of
cropland maps is used by FAO to estimate the fertilizer
consumption by the following equation (Potter etal. 2010):
where F (i,j) is spatially precise fertility maps of N or P
(units = kg of N or P ha−1), FFAO(k) is total yearly national
consumption of N or P in country k (unit = kg of N or P).
Whereas AM3-cropland (ij) spatially explicit farmland data
(unit = crop land area in ha of grid cell area), and AM3-crop
plant (k) with total harvest area of nation estimated from the
M3 crop database (unit = crop area in ha).
Fertilizer response (FR) is an important indicator of
fertilizer recommendations and as cumulative increments
in crop yield due to fertilization irrespective of quantity
and type of fertilizer used (Ichami etal. 2019). It is calcu-
lated as ratio of mean crop yield of the fertilized (
x−
t
in kg
ha−1) to the yield of unfertilized control plot’s (x¯c in kg
ha−1) (Hedges etal. 1999; Schut etal. 2018) and was com-
puted as a regression model to normalize the distribution
of data (Kihara etal. 2017). A normalized FR is required
to develop a multivariate regression in meta-regression
models. The lnFR was computed as
F
(i,j)=FFAO(k)
A
M3−Cropland
(i,j)
A
M
3
−Cropland
(k)
+ kgha−1,i,j,𝜀
k
lnFR = ln(x−
t
x−
c)
FR is a useful concept to evaluate the response of a soil to
an applied fertilizer in a region (Njoroge etal. 2017). Soils
having FR greater than 1 were classified as responsive and
soils with FR less than or equal to 1 are designated as less
responsive (Vanlauwe etal. 2015; Ichami etal. 2019).
3 Customized Fertilizers
Customized fertilizers (CF) are multi-nutrient carriers
designed to contain macro, secondary, and/or micro nutri-
ents each from inorganic sources and/or organic sources
(Majumdar and Prakash 2018; Dasgupta etal. 2021). CF
developed through systematic scientific granulation process
is tailored to meet out regional crop-specific nutritional
needs (Vidyashree and Arthanari 2021). The target behind
the tailored fertilizer is to supply site-specific nutrient man-
agement (Bhattacharya etal. 2019) to achieving maximum
fertilizer use efficiency for the applied nutrient in a cost
effective manner (Argento etal. 2021). Customized fertiliz-
ers promote site-specific nutrient management with com-
plete variability of nutrients in right proportion for a selected
crop supported by soil testing and crop demand (Rakshit
etal. 2012; Choudhary etal. 2020; Deepranjan Sarkar etal.
2020). CF are in line with the site-specific nutrient man-
agement which ensures targeted application of major and
micronutrients at specific amount for every holding (Dipak
Sarkar etal. 2017; Kumar etal. 2020). Customized fertiliz-
ers focus on nutrient requirement of the crop in a particular
area through physically mixed and steam granulated technol-
ogy known as fusion blending (Yadav 2012; Kumar etal.
2020). To boost the crop production, an innovative product
such as customized fertilizers specific to an agro climatic
conditions might be supplied to farmers to mitigate nutrient
Table 1 Long-term experiments showing the agronomic value of potassium and recovery efficiency by various crops
* Grain yield of plot received K-fertilizer-control with no K-fertilizer/K-fertilizer input
** Grain yield/kgK uptake
Crop Rate of fertilizer application *Agronomy effi-
ciency of potassium
(%)
**Recovery effi-
ciency of potassium
(%)
Reference
Rice 10-year long-term experiment at 225 (kg K2O ha−1) 19.0, 26.0, 18.0 37.0, 61.0, 56.0 (Achim Dobermann
2007; Dhillon etal.
2019)
Wheat K rates at 51, 102, and 154 (kg K2O ha−1) 6.1, 5.9, 3, 0.1 23.7, 19.0, 13.3 (Zhan etal. 2016)
Maize 16-year experiment at 133 and 225 (kg K2O ha−1) 10.8, 4.9 37.3, 28.5 (Qiu etal. 2014)
Common bean 2years at 200 gm K kg−1 soil 22.5 - (Fageria etal. 2001)
Clitoria + pigeon pea
Acacia + pigeon pea
2years at 39 kgha−1 46.0 - (de Moura etal. 2010)
Sweet potato 22.8g of K2O kg−1 soil in a pot without K - 71.0 (Tang etal. 2015)

Journal of Soil Science and Plant Nutrition
1 3
deficiencies, particularly of secondary and micronutrients
(Haque and Haque 2016; Jeevika and Sreya 2016; Singh
etal. 2019). In this context, we understand that customized
fertilizers could be helpful to promote site-specific nutri-
ent management to maximize the nutrient-use efficiency of
applied nutrients in cost-effective manner (Table2).
4 Reverse Blending (RB) andDelayed
Dierential toAchieve Customized
Fertilizers
Delayed differentiation is one of the fundamental methods of
mass customization andhas proved to be high-performance
techniquein the industrial sector (Guo etal. 2018). However,
this is still underused in the process industry, particularly
when differentiation refers to product content rather than
design/production. Mass customization involves product
differentiation point (PDP) which refers to an action that
converts an input substrate into a unique product (Daaboul
and Cunha 2014; Kombaya etal. 2021). This concept can
be defined as the transformation of many more nutrients
into a customized fertilizer based on crop demand (Galizia
etal. 2020). Delayed differentiation addresses both fertilizers
and its packing and could be carried out in small capacity
blending units near to end users. Delayed differentiation of
fertilizer production through reverse blending (RB) comes
out to be an efficient technique of delivering customized/
miscible fertilizers that meet out precisely the needs of sus-
tainable agriculture while eliminating the production and
transportation concerns (Gao etal. 2019; Benhamou etal.
2020, 2022). However, this approach requires the design and
development of new chemical inputs which may need reen-
gineering the production and distribution processes (e.g., use
of new raw materials). For a fertilizer industry, this implies
developing a wide range of complex fertilizer, processed
through chemical reaction of raw material. The challenge,
therefore, is how to improve the performance of fertilizer
supply in terms of both efficiency (i.e., respond to sustain-
able agricultural needs) and effectiveness (reduce costs). For
this, we propose the RB solution as an approach introduced
by Benhamouet al. (2018) based on to finding out the new
chemical specifications using small inputs. RB is a one-stage
blending technique that is used to produce fertilizers, where
the attempt isto develop the set of “I” inputs which are
known as canonical basic inputs (CBIs). The composition
Table 2 Response of important crops to CF with increase in economic yield against standard check using customized fertilizers
s. no Customized fertilizer application Crop Grain
Yield (q
ha−1)
(%) increase
from control
Reference
Customized fertilizer @ 250kg/ha
(N-14:P2O5-21:K2O-8:Zn-0.5%)
Rice 50.98 39.44 (Dwivedi and Meshram 2014; Kumar etal.
2020)
70%- Farmers fertilizer practice through
customized fertilizer (FFP = N-120:P2O5-
60:K2O-40 kgha−1)
Rice 69.94 17.07 (Naveen etal. 2017)
Customized fertilizer@ 450kg ha−1
(N-14:P-17:K-17%)
Rice 47.88 43.7 (Nagabovanalli Basavarajappa etal. 2021)
Recommended dosage of fertilizer through
customized fertilizer (N-100:P2O5-
50:K2O-50 kgha−1 at 3 equal doses)
Onion 22.34 14.10 (Kamble and Kathmale 2015)
Customized fertilizer @ 250 kgha−1
(N-12:P2O5-26:K2O-18:S-5:Zn-0.5)
Wheat 50.40 16.07 (Tiwari etal. 2021)
Customized fertilizer@ 500kg ha−1 (N-7:P-
3:K-25:Mg-4:Zn-1.25:B-4%)
Elephant foot yam 67.5 23.55 (Anju etal. 2020)
Customized fertilizer (N-70–145:P2O5-
30–60:K2O-55–85 kgha−1)
Cassava 37.6 18.61 (Byju etal. 2016)
Customized fertilizer (N-11:P2O5- 27:
K2O-0:S-6.6:Zn-0.5%)
Chickpea 2.20 14.00 (Dwivedi etal. 2019)
Customized fertilizer @150kg ha−1
(N-14:P2O5-17:K2O-14:S-5:Zn-
0.2:B-0.2%)
Potato 134.32 35.00 (Mandal etal. 2020)
Customized fertilizer at recommended
dosage of 150 kgha−1 (N-56.25:P2O5-
63.75:K2O-41.25:Zn-1.50%)
Soybean 976.00 31.00 (Verma etal. 2015)
Customized fertilizer @562.50 kgha−1
(N-143.7:P2O5-79.7:K2O-51.6:S-
14.0:Zn-1.8%)
Fingermillet 32.79 75.00 (Goud etal. 2015)

Journal of Soil Science and Plant Nutrition
1 3
of CBIs is necessarily characterized by the nutrients N, P,
K, B2O3, and the filler which is later found in the output “j”
fertilizer formula. In this approach, the objective is, in fact,
to start from the demands Dj of the outputs j to define the
characteristics (weight percentage of the component c in the
total weight of the CBIi) of the I CBIs (hence, the name of
the reverse blending) while keeping I (input) as small as
possible (Benhamou etal. 2020). Fertilizer producers who
wish to implement reverse blending must be therefore pre-
pared to redesign the supply chain to give a perfect nutri-
tional requirement of a particular crop. This approach drives
a high flow massification by managing the flow from 100 to
1.57% based on experimental findings to develop fertilizer
formulations.
Constraints related to respecting the requested quantity
Dj for each output j: simultaneously with the search for the
optimal composition of the CBIs, while RB aims at defin-
ing the optimal blending of selected CBIs taken in quanti-
ties ijx (decision variable) to obtain the quantity Dj which is
requested quantity for each output j as demonstrated through
models 1 and 2:
In this model, the nutritional demands (Dj) refer to the
potential demands that farmers would need if they would
want to apply custom fertilizers to accurately meet their
nutritional requirements of a crop. Constraints related to
meeting the nutritional requirements βcj (proportional wt.
of component “c” in wt. of output j). xij is quantity of inter-
mediate (i) used in j production.
The relative weight (∑i αci.xij/Dj) of component “c” in
output j (fertilizer) obtained by blending must be equal to
the requested nutritional specification (βcj. αci), which is
proportional weight of “c” component in the total weight
of intermediate (i):
(2)
∑i
Xij ≤Dj,∀
j
(3)
∑
i∝ci.
X
ij
D
j
=𝛽cj,∀c,
j
5 Optimum CBI Composition toProduce
Customized Fertilizers
Canonical basis inputs (CBIs) are the smallest set of chemi-
cal composite materials that can be used as a blending input
for the production of customized fertilizers. These composite
materials may not have the fertilizer properties, but their
mixtures can fulfil the requirements (in terms of component
proportion) of any fertilizer, including the production of cus-
tomizable fertilizers. In manufacturing design process, bill
of materials (BOM) is used to represent the product struc-
ture. Here, BOM is made up of the blended mixtures of CBIs
that form a bill of materials, which is used to produce any
quantity of a desired fertilizer. CBI (composite materials)
must be chemically and physically compatible for hazardless
outcomes. For instance, it is not possible to combine two
CBIs that use urea and one that uses triple super phosphate
while making a fertilizer. CBIs can be created to blended
fertilizers, which are made by combining composite materi-
als that are chemically compatible.
RB not only identifies the CBIs, but it also shows how
much of every CBI unit is needed to make the exact volume
of each fertilizer with matching chemical composition. To
reach the necessary quantities, a filler (ineffective) must be
used in concert with the CBIs. It was discovered that RB
could be used to develop fertilizers for 28 different crops
and all of them could be created with only 8 CBIs (Table3).
Table3 summarizes each CBI’s chemical composition with
respect to N, P, K, Zn, B2O3, and filler (a non-effective com-
ponent added for chemical stabilization having no effect on
the nutritional structure). In contrast, when we evaluate the
impact of RB on the fertilizer plant’s production system,
the manufacturers focus on the volume of CBIs to be cre-
ated within its production unit, rather than how they will be
further used to downregulate the supply chain in blending
units. Table3 reveals how production could be obtained if
CBIs had been used on monthly basis. Comparative demon-
stration (Table4) reveals how only first four CBIs could sig-
nificantly simplify the production procedures using formulas
in every month, particularly the second CBIs account for
Table 3 Composition of
CBIs used in reverse blending
for production customized
fertilizers (Benhamou etal.
2018)
Canonical basic inputs (CBIs)
CBI-1 CBI-2 CBI-3 CBI-4 CBI-5 CBI-6 CBI-7 CBI-8 Filler
N (%) 46.00% 11.86% 12.70% 19.00% 0.00% 2.34% 2.14% 0.00% 0.00%
P (%) 0.00% 56.08% 16.11% 38.00% 0.00% 56.00% 56.00% 51.24% 0.00%
K (%) 0.00% 0.00% 16.11% 0.00% 63.60% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00%
S (%) 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 7.00% 25.27% 11.78% 7.06% 19.67% 0.00%
B2O3 (%) 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 6.13% 3.15% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00%
Zn (%) 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 7.79% 0.00%
Filler (%) 54.00% 32.06% 55.07% 36.00% 5.00% 26.72% 34.81% 21.30% 100.00%

Journal of Soil Science and Plant Nutrition
1 3
more than 90% of monthly production. The aforementioned
flow consolidation indicates the possibility of creating a new
MTS-based production system. Indeed, taking into consid-
eration the respective share of each CBI (Table2), we sug-
gest appropriate CBI allocation to simplify the production
lines with continuous and streamlined flow to the greater
possible extent (1 CBI per production line) and to reap the
benefits of cost-effective technology.
There are fertilizer formulas with known available nutri-
ent percentage available (N, P, K, Zn). These formulations
also include extra adjuvants known as fillers, which typically
have no effect on crop yields. One feature of the inputs used
to construct the optimum formula is the percent range of
nutritional values. Based on the parameters listed in Table3
and the statistical assumption or model, the appropriate for-
mulations can be calculated (Table4). According to research
done by Benhamou etal. (2019), the 8 CBIs generated by
Xpress solver programming commands can yield up to 700
fertilizer formulation for various crops. Similar studies have
shown that reverse blending could create 28 distinct fertilizer
solutions by using just 8 CBIs (Benhamou 2020).
6 Extended Reverse Blending (ERB)
The following algorithm may be applied to obtain the best solu-
tion to produce fertilizers using the adapted pooling problem
(APP) approach. The AAP is a parametric quadratic problem
used to find out the lowest value of I1 (a parametric feature) of
a canonical basis of I1 CBIs (a parametric feature) to get the
optimal fertilizer solution (the optimal size of I1 of CBIs and the
optimal fertilizer blends can be expressed as xij/Dj,
∀jϵΩ1, i=
I1).
ERB technique combines APP and a set of I1 of I1 CBIs to
create new composite materials and blending of which can gen-
erate an optimum set-1 of Ji fertilizer (Fig.7). Combining the
initial and new composite materials can generate the optimum
set Ω1 of J1 fertilizers, as shown in Fig.7. Afterward, running
of RBP will facilitate to find out the smallest set of I2 of new
inputs (composite material) that correspond to I2 of new CBIs.
Combining the initial I1 composite material of I1 CBI with I2 of
new CBI gives a blending solution for new (J2) fertilizer. At the
conclusion, all fertilizer standards (Ω = Ω1 U Ω2) are satisfied.
CBI technology is to be developed by mixing new compatible
composite materials by adopted pooling problem (AAP) leading
to substantial rise in I of CBIs (Fig.7). The number of required
CBIs grew from 7 to 12 while using the extended reverse blend-
ing (ERB) holistic model (possibly unfit for manufacturing).
ERB results can be achieved by using AAP followed
by RBP model from composite material of Table3 to
determine the optimum CBI which maximizes the set
of J1 fertilizer. This is followed by using RBP model to
define the reaming optimal set of CBI which can be com-
bined with the earlier CBI determined through AAP to
produce Ω2 of J2 fertilizer. Ferti-maps play a key role in
deciding the best possible operational solution to obtain
blended multi-nutrient fertilizers. Since fertilizers are
marketed in the form of percentage formulas, it is neces-
sary to convert the quantitative NPK requirements into
crop needs expressed in fertilizer formulas. For exam-
ple, to meet NPK requirement of 531.52kg/ha with for-
mula (%) 26.03 − 4.90 − 21.07. By multiplying these %
with the required quantity (531.52kg/ha), we can obtain
respective quantities of N, P, and K as 138.33, 26.06,
and 112kg/ha.
Table 4 Composition of inputs
(composite material) and
compatible matrix (Benhamou
etal. 2020)
Composite material (k)
Filler Urea TSP KCl MAP DAP Potas-
sium
nitrates
k = 1 k = 2 k = 3 k = 4 k = 5 k = 6 k = 7
Composition of the composite materials (γck)
Component c%N c = 1 0 46 0 0 11.2 18.3 13.0
%P c = 2 0 0 46 0 55.0 46.4 0
%K c = 3 0 0 0 60 0 0 46.0
% Filler c = 4 100.0 54.0 54.0 40.0 33.8 35.3 41.0
Matrix of the composite materials in compatibilities (ξkk)
Composite material (k) Filler k = 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Urea k = 2 0 0 1 1 0 0 0
TSP k = 3 0 1 0 0 0 0 0
KCl k = 0 1 0 0 0 0 0
MoP k = 5 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
DAP k = 6 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Posam nitrate k = 7 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Journal of Soil Science and Plant Nutrition
1 3
7 Fertilizer Customization andEcosystem
The judicious application of synthetic fertilizers is cru-
cial for improving ecological integrity in any food pro-
duction system while minimizing detrimental effects on
the environment (Nyamangara etal. 2020). Ecosystem
services include both tangible and intangible benefits to
millions of people (Müller and Burkhard 2012; La Notte
etal. 2017). Blanket fertilizer recommendations have a
negative impact on the environment (Rahman and Zhang
2018), apart from using nutrients in excess of quantity,
the another key cause is low fertilizer-use efficiency
(Nagabovanalli Basavarajappa etal. 2021). To achieve
supply–demand synchronization, fertilizer management
strategies must account for temporal fluctuations in crop
nutrient requirements (Ram etal. 2012). When fertilizer
treatments are not synchronized with crop needs, there
are significant nutrient losses from the soil–plant sys-
tem, resulting in low fertilizer usage efficiency (Nagabo-
vanalli Basavarajappa etal. 2021). Customized fertilizers
may be proved beneficial in maintaining food security
and conserving the environment (Barman etal. 2020).
Therefore, major steps need to be taken to boost agricul-
tural output by the application of customizedfertilizers
developed through innovative, climate-smart technology
like reverse blending.
8 Conclusion
Global agriculture production is built on the foundation of
crop nutrition and proper fertilizer use to address agrarian
productivity. Improving the efficiency and effectiveness
of fertilizers can potentially reduce the over-exploitation
of non-renewable fertilizer sources. Developing innova-
tive fertilizer formulas has significant potential to address
serious challenges of rationalized fertilization. Delayed
differentiation of fertilizer production through RB comes
out to be an efficient technique of delivering customized/
miscible fertilizers that meet out precisely the needs of
sustainable agriculture while eliminating the produc-
tion and transportation concerns. Delayed differentiation
addressesboth fertilizers and their packaging, which can
be carried out in small capacity blending units near to end
users. RB uses a set of optimum “I” inputs, called canoni-
cal basic inputs (CBIs) with known chemical composition
with respect to N, P, K, Zn, B2O3, and filler. In addition,
RB determines the CBIs for a particular crop and eco-
system to produce an appropriate amount of each ferti-
lizer with the desired chemical nature. Customized fer-
tilizers promote site-specific nutrient management with
complete variability of nutrients in right proportion for a
selected crop supported by soil testing and crop demand.
There are many potential opportunities through cutting-
edge technologies in fertilizer customization to increase
crop-nutrient use efficiency in different ecologies. Gaps
in scientific understanding on the production of tailored
fertilizers will require collaborative attention of agrono-
mist, soil scientists, fertilizer industry, and environment
authorities for long-term interests of human population.
Acknowledgements This study was supported by G.B. Pant National
Institute of Himalayan Environment—Almora (Ministry of Envi-
ronment and Climate Change, Govt. of India—New Delhi) [Ref no.
NMHS/SG-2016/018; Date: March 31, 2016].
Declarations
Conflict of Interest The authors declare no competing interests.
Fig. 7 A Illustration showing
mass customization by extended
reverse blending approach in
comparison with pooling. The
approach combines AAP at
J1 set solution from existing
composite material of I1 CBIs.
Blending produces largest set of
Ω1 of J1 fertilizer. B RB exploits
smallest set J2 from a CBI
composite material correspond-
ing to I2, combining set of initial
input gives blending formula of
fertilizer J2

Journal of Soil Science and Plant Nutrition
1 3
References
Alewell C, Ringeval B, Ballabio C, Robinson DA, Panagos P, Bor-
relli P (2020) Global phosphorus shortage will be aggravated
by soil erosion. Nat Commun 11:4546. https:// doi. org/ 10. 1038/
s41467- 020- 18326-7
Alewell C, Ringeval B, Ballabio C, Robinson DA, Panagos P, Bor-
relli P (2020) Global phosphorus shortage will be aggravated
by soil erosion. Nat Commun 11:1–12. https:// doi. org/ 10. 1038/
s41467- 020- 18326-7
Anju P, John KS, Bhadraray S, Suja G, Mathew J, Nair K, Sunitha S,
Veena S (2020) Customized fertilizer formulations for elephant
foot yam (Amorphophallus paeoniifolius (Dennst.) Nicolson)
under intercropping in coconut gardens for Kerala. India J Ind
Soc Soil Sci 68:221–235. https:// doi. org/ 10. 5958/ 0974- 0228.
2020. 00025.0
Argento F, Anken T, Abt F, Vogelsanger E, Walter A, Liebisch F
(2021) Site-specific nitrogen management in winter wheat sup-
ported by low-altitude remote sensing and soil data. Preci Agri-
cul 22:364–386. https:// doi. org/ 10. 1007/ s11119- 020- 09733-3
Barman M, Das A, Mukhopadhyay A (2020) Customized fertilizers: a
boon to agricultural sector. Agricul Food News Lett 2:417–419
Barrett CB (2021) Overcoming global food security challenges through
science and solidarity. Am J Agric Econ 103:422–447. https://
doi. org/ 10. 1111/ ajae. 12160
Basak B, Maity A, Ray P, Biswas D, Roy S (2022) Potassium supply in
agriculture through biological potassium fertilizer: a promising and
sustainable option for developing countries. Arch Agron Soil Sci
68:101–114. https:// doi. org/ 10. 1080/ 03650 340. 2020. 18211 91
Belayneh M, Yirgu T, Tsegaye D (2019) Potential soil erosion estima-
tion and area prioritization for better conservation planning in
Gumara watershed using RUSLE and GIS techniques’. Environ
Sys Res 8:1–17. https:// doi. org/ 10. 1186/ s40068- 019- 0149-x
Benhamou (2020) Potential benefits of reverse blending in the fertilizer
industry. Paper presented at the IFIP International Conference
on Advances in Production Management Systems. Advances in
Production Management Systems. The Path to Digital Trans-
formation and Innovation of Production Management Systems.
APMS 2020. IFIP Advances in Information and Communication
Technology, vol 591. Springer, Cham. https:// doi. org/ 10. 1007/
978-3- 030- 57993-7_ 26
Benhamou L, Fontane F, Giard V, Grabot B (2018) Reverse blending:
an efficient answer to the challenge of obtaining required ferti-
lizer variety. In: ILS Conference 2018, Jul 2018, Lyon, France,
pp 434–443 ⟨hal-02157871⟩. https:// hal. archi ves- ouver tes. fr/
hal- 02157 871
Benhamou L, Fenies P, Fontane F, Giard V (2019) Reverse blending
as a strategy for purely customizing fertilizers while consider-
ably reducing the diversity to be produced: a case study. In:
SYMPHOS 2019 – 5th International Symposium on Innovation
& Technology in the Phosphate Industry. Available at SSRN:
https:// ssrn. com/ abstr act= 36360 66 or https:// doi. org/ 10. 2139/
ssrn. 36360 66
Benhamou L, Giard V, Khouloud M, Fenies P, Fontane F (2020)
Reverse blending: An economically efficient approach to the
challenge of fertilizer mass customization. Inter J Product Econ
226:107603. https:// doi. org/ 10. 1016/j. ijpe. 2019. 107603
Benhamou L, Giard V, Fénies P (2022) Un outil de conception et de
production intelligent permettant la personnalisation d’une pro-
duction continue de masse. Revue Française de Gestion Industri-
elle 36:107–26. https:// doi. org/ 10. 53102/ 2022. 36. 01. 871
Berde CV, Gawde SS, Berde VB (2021) Potassium solubilization:
mechanism and functional impact on plant growth In: Yadav AN
(ed) Soil microbiomes for sustainable agriculture. Sustainable
development and biodiversity, vol 27. Springer, Cham. https://
doi. org/ 10. 1007/ 978-3- 030- 73507-4_5
Bhattacharya P, Sengupta S, Halder S (2019) Customized, fortified and
nano enabled fertilizers-prioritizing and profiteering sustainabil-
ity in agriculture. Advan Agricul Sci 19:69–97
Bijay S, Singh Y (2017) Management and use efficiency of fertilizer
nitrogen in production of cereals in India—issues and strategies.
J Indian Nitrogen Manag 10:149–162
Byju G, Nedunchezhiyan M, Hridya A, Soman S (2016) Site-specific
nutrient management for cassava in Southern India. Agron J
108:830–840. https:// doi. org/ 10. 2134/ agron j2015. 0263
Cassman KG, Peng S, Olk D, Ladha J, Reichardt W, Dobermann A,
Singh U (1998) Opportunities for increased nitrogen-use effi-
ciency from improved resource management in irrigated rice
systems. Field Crop Res 56:7–39. https:// doi. org/ 10. 1016/ s0378-
4290(97) 00140-8
Chaudhari SK, Biswas PP, Kapil H (2020) Soil health and fertility.
In: Mishra BB (ed) The soils of india. Springer International
Publishing, Cham, pp 215–231
Choudhary S, Kumar R, Kumar A, Ranjan RD (2020) Customized
fertilizers-all in one a review. Inter Res J Pure Appl Chem
21(9):27–39. https:// doi. org/ 10. 9734/ irjpac/ 2020/ v21i9 30196
Collins HP, Kimura E, Frear CS, Kruger CE (2016) Phosphorus uptake
by potato from fertilizers recovered from anaerobic digestion.
Agron J 108:2036–2049. https:// doi. org/ 10. 2134/ agron j2015.
0302
Daaboul J, Cunha CMD (2014) Differentiation and customer decou-
pling points: key value enablers for mass customization. Paper
Presented Ifip Int Conf Adv Prod Manag Syst. https:// doi. org/ 10.
1007/ 978-3- 662- 44733-8_6
Dasgupta S, Sengupta S, Saha S, Sarkar A, Anantha KC (2021)
Approaches in advanced soil elemental extractability: catapult-
ing future soil–plant nutrition research. In: Rakshit A, Singh S,
Abhilash P, Biswas A (eds) Soil science: fundamentals to recent
advances. Springer, Singapore. https:// doi. org/ 10. 1007/ 978- 981-
16- 0917-6_ 10
Dawson CJ, Hilton J (2011) Fertiliser availability in a resource-limited
world: production and recycling of nitrogen and phosphorus.
Food Pol 36:S14–S22. https:// doi. org/ 10. 1016/j. foodp ol. 2010.
11. 012
de Moura EG, Serpa SS, dos Santos JGD, Sobrinho JRSC, Aguiar
AdCF (2010) nutrient use efficiency in alley cropping systems
in the Amazonian periphery. Plant Soil 335:363–371. https:// doi.
org/ 10. 1007/ s11104- 010- 0424-0
Dehkordi PA, Nehbandani A, Hassanpour-bourkheili S, Kawkar B
(2020) Yield gap analysis using remote sensing and modelling
approaches: Wheat in the northwest of Iran. Inter J Plant Prod
14(443–4):52. https:// doi. org/ 10. 1007/ s42106- 020- 00095-4
Dhillon JS, Eickhoff EM, Mullen RW, Raun WR (2019) World potas-
sium use efficiency in cereal crops. Agron J 111:889–896. https://
doi. org/ 10. 2134/ agron j2018. 07. 0462
Dimkpa CO, Fugice J, Singh U, Lewis TD (2020) Development of fer-
tilizers for enhanced nitrogen use efficiency – trends and perspec-
tives. Sci Total Environ 731:139113. https:// doi. org/ 10. 1016/j.
scito tenv. 2020. 139113
Dobermann A, Witt C, Dawe D, Abdulrachman S, Gines HC, Naga-
rajan R, Satawathananont S, Son TT, Tan PS, Wang GH, Chien
NV, Thoa VTK, Phung CV, Stalin P, Muthukrishnan Simbahan
GC, Adviento MAA (2002) Site-specific nutrient management
for intensive rice cropping systems in Asia. Field Crop Res
74:37–66. https:// doi. org/ 10. 1016/ S0378- 4290(01) 00197-6
Dobermann A (2007) Nutrient use efficiency–measurement and
management. In: Krauss A, Isherwood K, Heffer P (eds) Fer-
tilizer best management practices: general principles, strategy
for their adoption and voluntary initiatives versus regulations.

Journal of Soil Science and Plant Nutrition
1 3
International Fertilizer Industry Association, Paris, pp 1–28.
https:// www. ferti lizer. org// images/ Libra ry_ Downl oads/ 2007_
IFA_ FBMP% 20Wor kshop_ Bruss els. pdf
Dwivedi S, Meshram M (2014) Effect of customized fertilizer on
productivity and nutrient uptake of rice (Oryza sativa). Ind J
Agron 59:247–250
Dwivedi S, Chitale S, Lakpale R (2019) Response of chickpea (Cicer
arietinum) to customized fertilizer under Chhattisgarh condi-
tion. Ind J Agron 64:103–108
Edixhoven J, Gupta J, Savenije H (2014) Recent revisions of phos-
phate rock reserves and resources: a critique. Earth Sys Dynam
5:491–507. https:// doi. org/ 10. 5194/ esd-5- 491- 2014
Etesami H (2020) Enhanced phosphorus fertilizer use efficiency with
microorganisms. In: Meena R (ed) Nutrient dynamics for sus-
tainable crop production. Springer, Singapore. https:// doi. org/
10. 1007/ 978- 981- 13- 8660-2_8
Evans JR, Lawson T (2020) From green to gold: agricultural revolu-
tion for food security. J Exp Bot 71(7):2211–2215. https:// doi.
org/ 10. 1093/ jxb/ eraa1 10
Fageria NK, Barbosa Filho MP, da Costa JGC (2001) Potassium-use
efficiency in common bean genotypes. J Plant Nutr 24:1937–
1945. https:// doi. org/ 10. 1081/ pln- 10010 7605
Fischer R, Byerlee D, Edmeades G (2014) Crop yields and global
food security: willyield increase continue to feed the world?
ACIAR Monograph No. 158. Australian Centre forInterna-
tional Agricultural Research, Canberra, pp xxii + 634
Fuglie K, Gautam M, Goyal A, Maloney WF (2019) Harvest-
ing prosperity: technology and productivity growth in agri-
culture. World Bank Publications. https:// doi. org/ 10. 1596/
978-1- 4648- 1393-1
Galizia FG, ElMaraghy H, Bortolini M, Mora C (2020) Product
platforms design, selection and customisation in high-variety
manufacturing. Inter J Product Res 58:893–911. https:// doi.
org/ 10. 1080/ 00207 543. 2019. 16027 45
Gao Y, Liu W, Zhu S (2019) Thermoplastic polyolefin elastomer blends
for multiple and reversible shape memory polymers. Indus Eng
Chem Res 58:19495–19502. https:// doi. org/ 10. 1021/ acs. iecr.
9b039 79. s001
Gennari P, Rosero-Moncayo J, Tubiello FN (2019) The FAO contri-
bution to monitoring SDGs for food and agriculture. Nat Plants
5:1196–1197
George T (2014) Why crop yields in developing countries have not
kept pace with advances in agronomy. Glob Food Secur 3:49–58.
https:// doi. org/ 10. 1016/j. gfs. 2013. 10. 002
Goud BR, Ramachandrappa B, Nanjappa H (2015) Influence of cus-
tomized fertilizers on growth and yield of finger millet Eleusine
coracana (L.) Gaertn. in Alfisols of Southern India. Ind J Dryland
Agricul Res Develop 30:50–54. https:// doi. org/ 10. 5958/ 2231-
6701. 2015. 00007.x
Guo S, Choi T-M, Shen B, Jung S (2018) Inventory management in
mass customization operations: A review. IEEE Transac on Eng
Manage 66:412–428. https:// doi. org/ 10. 1109/ tem. 2018. 28396 16
Haefele SM, Wopereis MCS, Ndiaye MK, Barro SE, Ould Isselmou M
(2003) Internal nutrient efficiencies, fertilizer recovery rates and
indigenous nutrient supply of irrigated lowland rice in Sahelian
West Africa. Field Crop Res 80:19–32. https:// doi. org/ 10. 1016/
S0378- 4290(02) 00152-1
Haque MA, Haque MM (2016) Growth, yield and nitrogen use effi-
ciency of new rice variety under variable nitrogen rates. Amer
J Plant Sci 7:612–622. https:// doi. org/ 10. 4236/ ajps. 2016. 73054
Hedges LV, Gurevitch J, Curtis PS (1999) The meta-analysis of response
ratios in experimental ecology. Ecology 80:1150–1156. https://
doi. org/ 10. 1890/ 0012- 9658(1999) 080[1150: tmaorr] 2.0. co;2
Ichami SM, Shepherd KD, Sila AM, Stoorvogel JJ, Hoffland E (2019)
Fertilizer response and nitrogen use efficiency in African
smallholder maize farms. Nutr Cycl Agroecosyst 113:1–19.
https:// doi. org/ 10. 1007/ s10705- 018- 9958-y
Incrocci L, Massa D, Pardossi A (2017) New trends in the fertigation man-
agement of irrigated vegetable crops. Horticulturae 3:37. https:// doi.
org/ 10. 3390/ horti cultu rae30 20037
Jeevika K, Sreya P (2016) Customized fertilizer: the fertilizers best
management practices. In: Package of practices recommenda-
tions: crops, 15th edn. Kerala Agricultural University, Thrissur,
p 392
Jupp AR, Beijer S, Narain GC, Schipper W, Slootweg JC (2021) Phos-
phorus recovery and recycling–closing the loop. Chem Soc
Review 50:87–101. https:// doi. org/ 10. 1039/ d0cs0 1150a
Kamble B, Kathmale D (2015) Effect of different levels of custom-
ized fertilizer on soil nutrient availability, yield and economics
of onion. J Appl Nat Sci 7:817–821. https:// doi. org/ 10. 31018/
jans. v7i2. 688
Kihara J, Sileshi GW, Nziguheba G, Kinyua M, Zingore S, Sommer
R (2017) Application of secondary nutrients and micronutri-
ents increases crop yields in sub-Saharan Africa. Agron Sustain
Develop 37:1–14. https:// doi. org/ 10. 1007/ s13593- 017- 0431-0
Kisinyo PO, Opala PA (2020) Depletion of phosphate rock reserves and
world food crisis: reality or hoax? Afri J Agricul Res 16:1223–
1227. https:// doi. org/ 10. 5897/ ajar2 020. 14892
Kombaya JV, Hamani N, Kermad L (2021) Customization measure-
ment in reconfigurable manufacturing systems (RMS). In: 11th
Annual International Conference on Industrial Engineering and
Operations Management, Mar 2021, Singapore, Singapore, pp
2340–2347 ⟨hal-03698657⟩
Kumar C, Kumar N, Ahamad A (2020) Feasibility of customized
fertilizers for sustainable productivity of rice. J Pharm Innov
9:211–215
La Notte A, D’Amato D, Mäkinen H, Paracchini ML, Liquete C, Egoh
B, Geneletti D, Crossman ND (2017) Ecosystem services clas-
sification: a systems ecology perspective of the cascade frame-
work. Ecol Indicators 74:392–402. https:// doi. org/ 10. 1016/j. ecoli
nd. 2016. 11. 030
Lian Y, Meng X, Yang Z, Wang T, Ali S, Yang B, Zhang P, Han Q, Jia
Z, Ren X (2017) Strategies for reducing the fertilizer applica-
tion rate in the ridge and furrow rainfall harvesting system in
semiarid regions. Scient Repor 7:2644. https:// doi. org/ 10. 1038/
s41598- 017- 02731-y
Linhart C, Niedrist GH, Nagler M, Nagrani R, Temml V, Bardelli T,
Wilhalm T, Riedl A, Zaller JG, Clausing P (2019) Pesticide con-
tamination and associated risk factors at public playgrounds near
intensively managed apple and wine orchards. Environ Sci Europ
31:1–16. https:// doi. org/ 10. 1186/ s12302- 019- 0206-0
Mahmah AE, Amar A (2021) Food security in the MENA region: does
agriculture performance matter?. In: Behnassi M, Barjees Baig
M, El Haiba M, Reed MR (eds) Emerging challenges to food pro-
duction and security in Asia, Middle East, and Africa. Springer,
Cham. https:// doi. org/ 10. 1007/ 978-3- 030- 72987-5_4
Majumdar K, Norton RM, Murrell TS, García F, Zingore S, Prochnow
LI, Pampolino M, Boulal H, Dutta S, Francisco E (2021) Assess-
ing potassium mass balances in different countries and scales.
Improving potassium recommendations for agricultural crops:
283.https:// doi. org/ 10. 1007/ 978-3- 030- 59197-7_ 11
Majumdar S, Prakash NB (2018) Prospects of customized fertilizers
in Indian agriculture. Curr Sci 115:242–248. https:// doi. org/ 10.
18520/ cs/ v115/ i2/ 242- 248
Mandal SK, Padbhushan R, Kumar M (2020) Response of customized
fertilizer application on growth, yield and economics of potato
(Solanum tuberosum L.) in eastern region of India. J Pharma
Phytochem 9:1475–1478
Mikkelsen RL, Roberts TL (2021) Inputs: potassium sources for agri-
cultural systems. In: Improving potassium recommendations

Journal of Soil Science and Plant Nutrition
1 3
for agricultural crops, pp 47–74. https:// doi. org/ 10. 1007/
978-3- 030- 59197-7
Mikula K, Izydorczyk G, Skrzypczak D, Mironiuk M, Moustakas
K, Witek-Krowiak A, Chojnacka K (2020) Controlled release
micronutrient fertilizers for precision agriculture – a review. Sci
Total Environ 712:136365. https:// doi. org/ 10. 1016/j. scito tenv.
2019. 136365
Mogollón J, Beusen A, Van Grinsven H, Westhoek H, Bouwman A
(2018) Future agricultural phosphorus demand according to
the shared socioeconomic pathways. Global Environ Change
50:149–163. https:// doi. org/ 10. 1016/j. gloen vcha. 2018. 03. 007
Müller F, Burkhard B (2012) The indicator side of ecosystem services.
Ecosyst Serv 1:26–30. https:// doi. org/ 10. 1016/j. ecoser. 2012. 06.
001
Nagabovanalli Basavarajappa P, Shruthi Lingappa MG, Goudra
Mahadevappa S (2021) Nutrient requirement and use efficiency
of rice (Oryza sativa L.) as influenced by graded levels of cus-
tomized fertilizer. J Plant Nutr 44:1–15. https:// doi. or g/ 10. 1080/
01904 167. 2021. 19270 81
Nations U (2019) World population prospects 2019: highlights. Depart-
ment of Economic and Social Affairs. https:// www. un. org/ devel
opment/ desa/ publi catio ns/ world- popul ation- prosp ects- 2019-
highl ights. html#: ~: text= The% 20wor ld's% 20pop ulati on% 20is%
20exp ected ,United% 20Nat ions% 20rep ort% 20lau nched% 20tod ay
Naveen L, Raj S, Leenakumary S (2017) Effect of a crop customised
fertiliser mixture on yield and yield components of rice in the
Kuttanad lowlands. Trend Biosci 10:2188–2192
Njoroge R, Otinga AN, Okalebo JR, Pepela M, Merckx R (2017)
Occurrence of poorly responsive soils in western Kenya and
associated nutrient imbalances in maize (Zea mays L.). Field
Crop Res 210:162–174. https:// doi. org/ 10. 1016/j. fcr. 2017. 05. 015
Nyamangara J, Kodzwa J, Masvaya EN, Soropa G (2020) The role
of synthetic fertilizers in enhancing ecosystem services in crop
production systems in developing countries. In: Rusinamhodzi
L (ed) The role of ecosystem services in sustainable food sys-
tems, pp 95–117. https:// doi. org/ 10. 1016/ B978-0- 12- 816436- 5.
00005-6
Nyffeler M, Şekercioğlu ÇH, Whelan CJ (2018) Insectivorous birds
consume an estimated 400–500 million tons of prey annually. The
Sci Nat 105:1–13. https:// doi. org/ 10. 1007/ s00114- 018- 1571-z
Nziguheba G, Zingore S, Kihara J, Merckx R, Njoroge S, Otinga A,
Vandamme E, Vanlauwe B (2016) Phosphorus in smallholder
farming systems of sub-Saharan Africa: implications for agricul-
tural intensification. Nut Cycl Agroecosys 104:321–340. https://
doi. org/ 10. 1007/ s10705- 015- 9729-y
Ojeda Rivera JO, Alejo-Jacuinde G, Nájera-González H-R, López-
Arredondo D (2022) Prospects of genetics and breeding for
low-phosphate tolerance: an integrated approach from soil to
cell. Theor Appl Genet: 1–26. https:// doi. org/ 10. 21203/ rs.3. rs-
10221 73/ v1
Ortiz-Bobea A, Ault TR, Carrillo CM, Chambers RG, Lobell DB
(2020) The historical impact of anthropogenic climate change
on global agricultural productivity. Nat Clim Chang 11:306–312.
https:// doi. org/ 10. 1038/ s41558- 021- 01000-1
Panayotova G, Kostadinova S (2015) Nitrogen fertilization of durum
wheat varieties. Bulgar J Agricul Sci 21:596–601
Papadopoulos A (2020) Soil health and foliar fertilisers. In: Giri B,
Varma A (eds) Soil health. Springer International Publishing,
Soil Biology, vol 59 (eBook Packages). Springer, Cham, pp 115–
120. https:// doi. org/ 10. 1007/ 978-3- 030- 44364-1_7, https:// link.
sprin ger. com/ chapt er/ 10. 1007/ 978-3- 030- 44364-1_7
Philp JNM, Cornish PS, Te KSH, Bell RW, Vance W, Lim V, Li X,
Kamphayae S, Denton MD (2021) Insufficient potassium and sul-
fur supply threaten the productivity of perennial forage grasses
in smallholder farms on tropical sandy soils. Plant Soil 461:617–
630. https:// doi. org/ 10. 1007/ s11104- 021- 04852-w
Potter P, Ramankutty N, Bennett EM, Donner SD (2010) Characteriz-
ing the spatial patterns of global fertilizer application and manure
production. Earth Interac 14:1–22. https:// doi. org/ 10. 1175/ 2009e
i288.1
Potter Philip NR, Elena M, Bennett SD (2021) Characterizing the spa-
tial patterns of global fertilizer application and manure produc-
tion. Earth Interac 14:1–22
Putra DP, Bimantio MP, Sahfitra AA, Suparyanto T, Pardamean B
(2020) Simulation of availability and loss of nutrient elements
in land with android-based fertilizing applications. In: Interna-
tional Conference on Information Management and Technology
(ICIMTech), 13–14 August 2020, pp 312–317.https:// doi. org/
10. 1109/ icimt ech50 083. 2020. 92112 68
Qaim M (2020) Role of new plant breeding technologies for food
security and sustainable agricultural development. Appl Econ
Perspect Policy 42:129–150. https:// doi. org/ 10. 1002/ aepp. 13044
Qiu S, Xie J, Zhao S, Xu X, Hou Y, Wang X, Zhou W, He P, Johnston
AM, Christie P (2014) Long-term effects of potassium ferti-
lization on yield, efficiency, and soil fertility status in a rain-
fed maize system in northeast China. Field Crop Res 163:1–9.
https:// doi. org/ 10. 1016/j. fcr. 2014. 04. 016
Rahman K, Zhang D (2018) Effects of fertilizer broadcasting on the
excessive use of inorganic fertilizers and environmental sustaina-
bility. Sustainability 10:759. https:// doi. org/ 10. 3390/ su100 30759
Raj E, Appadurai M, Athiappan K (2021) Precision farming in modern
agriculture. In: Choudhury A, Biswas A, Singh TP, Ghosh SK
(eds) Smart agriculture automation using advanced technologies.
Transactions on computer systems and networks. Springer, Sin-
gapore. https:// doi. org/ 10. 1007/ 978- 981- 16- 6124-2_4
Rakshit R, Rakshit A, Das A (2012) Customized fertilizers: marker in
fertilizer revolution. Inter JAgricul Environ Biotechnol 5:67–75
Ramankutty N, Evan AT, Monfreda C, Foley JA (2008) Farming the
planet: 1. Geographic distribution of global agricultural lands in
the year 2000, Global Biogeochem. Cycles 22:GB1003. https://
doi. org/ 10. 1029/ 2007G B0029 52, https:// agupu bs. onlin elibr ary.
wiley . com/ action/ showC itFor mats? doi= 10. 1029% 2F200 7GB00
2952
Ram A, Suhas PW, Kanwar LS, Singh P, Dhaka SR, Dhaka BL (2012)
Recent approaches in nitrogen management for sustainable
agricultural production and eco-safety. Arch Agron Soil Sci
58(9):1033–60. https:// doi. org/ 10. 1080/ 03650 340. 2011. 557368.
2910P
Randive K, Raut T, Jawadand S (2021) An overview of the global fer-
tilizer trends and India’s position in 2020. Mineral Econ 34:371–
384. https:// doi. org/ 10. 1007/ s13563- 020- 00246-z
Ren, Jin S, Wu Y, Zhang B, Kanter D, Wu B, Xi X, Zhang X, Chen D,
Xu J (2021) Fertilizer overuse in Chinese smallholders due to
lack of fixed inputs. J Environ Manage 293:112913. https:// doi.
org/ 10. 1016/j. jenvm an. 2021. 112913
Ren Wang Y, Ye Y, Zhao Y, Huang Y, Fu W, Chu X (2020) Effects
of continuous nitrogen fertilizer application on the diversity
and composition of rhizosphere soil bacteria. Front Microbiol
11:1948. https:// doi. org/ 10. 3389/ fmicb. 2020. 01948
Ritchie H (2021) Can we reduce fertilizer use without sacrificing food
production. Our world in data a project of the Global Change
Data Lab, a registered charity in England and Wales (Charity
Number 1186433). https:// ourwo rldin data. org/ reduc ing- ferti
lizer- use. Accessed 11.9.2021
Roberts TL, Johnston AE (2015) Phosphorus use efficiency and man-
agement in agriculture. Resour Conser Recycl 105:275–281
Saleem I, Maqsood MA, Rehman MZ, Aziz T, Bhatti IA, Ali S (2021)
Potassium ferrite nanoparticles on DAP to formulate slow

Journal of Soil Science and Plant Nutrition
1 3
release fertilizer with auxiliary nutrients. Ecotoxicol Environ
Saf 215:112148. https:// doi. org/ 10. 1016/j. ecoenv. 2021. 112148
Salim N, Raza A (2020) Nutrient use efficiency (NUE) for sustainable
wheat production: a review. J Plant Nutr 43:297–315. https:// doi.
org/ 10. 1080/ 01904 167. 2019. 16769 07
Sanchez PA (2020) Time to increase production of nutrient-rich foods.
Food Policy, Viewpoint Elsevier, vol 91(C), p 101843. https://
doi. org/ 10. 1016/j. foodp ol. 2020. 101843
Sarkar D, Kar SK, Chattopadhyay A, Rakshit A, Tripathi VK, Dubey
PK, Abhilash PC (2020) Low input sustainable agriculture: a
viable climate-smart option for boosting food production in a
warming world. Ecol Indicat 115:106412. https:// doi. org/ 10.
1016/j. ecoli nd. 2020. 106412
Sarkar D, Meena VS, Haldar A, Rakshit A (2017) Site-specific nutrient
management (SSNM): a unique approach towards maintaining
soil health. In: Rakshit A, Abhilash P, Singh H, Ghosh S (eds)
Adaptive soil management: from theory to practices. Springer,
Singapore. https:// doi. org/ 10. 1007/ 978- 981- 10- 3638-5_3
Sattari SZ, van Ittersum MK, Bouwman AF, Smit AL, Janssen BH
(2014) Crop yield response to soil fertility and N, P, K inputs
in different environments: testing and improving the QUEFTS
model. Field Crop Res 157:35–46. https:// doi. org/ 10. 1016/j. fcr.
2013. 12. 005
Scholz RW, Wellmer FW (2013) Approaching a dynamic view on the
availability of mineral resources: what we may learn from the
case of phosphorus? Glob Environ Change 23(1):11–27
Schut AG, Traore PCS, Blaes X, Rolf A (2018) Assessing yield and fer-
tilizer response in heterogeneous smallholder fields with UAVs
and satellites. Field Crop Res 221:98–107. https:// doi. org/ 10.
1016/j. fcr. 2018. 02. 018
Siddaramappa S (2021) Tracing the path to food security in independ-
ent India. Sci Cult 87(5–6):180–186
Sigurdarson JJ, Svane S, Karring H (2018) The molecular processes of
urea hydrolysis in relation to ammonia emissions from agricul-
ture. Rev Environ Sci Bio/technol 17:241–258. https:// doi. org/
10. 1007/ s11157- 018- 9466-1
Singh H, D ML, Choudhary RL, Meena MD, Meena MK (2019) Cus-
tomized fertilizers: key for higher crop productivity. Soil Health:
Technol Inter 2:9–11
Sipert S, Cohim E, do Nascimento FRA (2020) Identification and quan-
tification of main anthropogenic stocks and flows of potassium
in Brazil. Environ Sci Pollut Res 27:32579–32593. https:// doi.
org/ 10. 1007/ s11356- 020- 09526-1
Smil V (2000) Phosphorus in the environment: natural flows and
human interferences. Annual Review Energy Environ 25:53–88.
https:// doi. org/ 10. 1146/ annur ev. energy. 25.1. 53
Sonali JMI, Kavitha R, Kumar PS, Rajagopal R, Gayathri KV, Ghfar
AA, Govindaraju S (2022) Application of a novel nanocomposite
containing micro-nutrient solubilizing bacterial strains and CeO2
nanocomposite as bio-fertilizer. Chemosphere 286:131800.
https:// doi. org/ 10. 1016/j. chemo sphere. 2021. 131800
Srichaipanya W, Artrit P, Sangrung A (2014) Fertilizer quality control
of a bulk-blending plant using intelligent systems. J Sci Technol
21(3):137–146
Srinivasarao C (2021) Programmes and policies for improving fertilizer
use efficiency in agriculture. Ind J Ferti 17:226–254
Stewart WM, Roberts TL (2012) Food security and the role of fertilizer
in supporting it. Proced Eng 46:76–82. https:// doi. org/ 10. 1016/j.
proeng. 2012. 09. 448
Sweeting A, Balan DJ, Kreisle N, Panhans MT, Raval D (2020) Eco-
nomics at the FTC: fertilizer, consumer complaints, and private
label cereal. Rev Indust Org 57:751–781. https:// doi. o r g/ 10. 1007/
s11151- 020- 09792-w
Syers J, Johnston A, Curtin D (2008) Efficiency of soil and fertilizer
phosphorus use. FAO Fert Plant Nutrit Bullet 18. https:// soil5
813. oksta te. edu/ Sprin g2012/ Syers% 202008. pdf
Tang Z-H, Zhang A-J, Wei M, Chen X-G, Liu Z-H, Li H-M, Ding Y-F
(2015) Physiological response to potassium deficiency in three
sweet potato (Ipomoea batatas [L.] Lam.) genotypes differing
in potassium utilization efficiency. Acta Physiol Plant 37:1–10.
https:// doi. org/ 10. 1007/ s11738- 015- 1901-0
Tenkorang FA (2006) Projecting world fertilizer demand in 2015 and
2030. Thesis, Purdue University, West Lafayette. ProQuest Infor-
mation and Learning Company, Ann Arbor. https:// www. proqu
est. com/ openv iew/ 06de1 325ed 55c90 82435 2e9af 08974 8d/1? pq-
origs ite= gscho lar& cbl= 18750 & diss=y
Tiwari H, Kumar N, Anshuman K, Yadav S, Singh N, Srivastava A
(2021) Effect of customized fertilizer on yield and economics
of wheat (Triticum aestivum L.). Pharm Innov J 10(4):592–595
Vanlauwe B, Descheemaeker K, Giller KE, Huising J, Merckx R,
Nziguheba G, Wendt J, Zingore S (2015) Integrated soil fertility
management in sub-Saharan Africa: unravelling local adaptation.
Soil 1:491–508. https:// doi. org/ 10. 5194/ soil-1- 491- 2015
Verma D, Singh R (2019) Effect of zinc (zn) on growth, yield, and qual-
ity attributes of rice (Oryza sativa L.) for improved rice production.
In: Agronomic rice practices and postharvest processing. Apple
Academic Press,pp 151–173.https:// doi. org/ 10. 1201/ 97804 29488
580- 15
Verma AT, Pandagare SK, Shrivastava G, Pandey N (2015) Assessment
of customized fertilizer for soybean [Glycine max (L.) Merrill]
in Chhattisgarh plains under rainfed condition. Soybean Res
13(2):19–25
Vidyashree B, Arthanari PM (2021) Customized fertilizers-an artefact
in Indian agriculture: a review. Agric Rev 42:1–6. https:// doi. org/
10. 18805/ ag.r- 1886, http:// arcca rticl es. s3. amazo naws. com/ arcc/
Attac hment- at- accept- artic le-R- 1886. pdf
Vollset SE, Goren E, Yuan C-W, Cao J, Smith AE, Hsiao T, Bisig-
nano C, Azhar GS, Castro E, Chalek J (2020) Fertility, mortality,
migration, and population scenarios for 195 countries and ter-
ritories from 2017 to 2100: a forecasting analysis for the Global
Burden of Disease Study. The Lancet 396:1285–1306. https://
doi. org/ 10. 1016/ s0140- 6736(20) 30677-2
Wang Z, Zhang W, Beebout SS, Zhang H, Liu L, Yang J, Zhang J
(2016) Grain yield, water and nitrogen use efficiencies of rice as
influenced by irrigation regimes and their interaction with nitro-
gen rates. Field Crop Res 193:54–69. https:// doi. org/ 10. 1016/j.
fcr. 2016. 03. 006
Williams C (2019) The worldwide fertilizer market to 2024. https://
www. w or ld ferti lizer. com/ envir onment/ 21032 019/ the- w or ld wide-
ferti lizer- market- to- 2024/
Wortmann CS, Dobermann AR, Ferguson RB, Hergert GW, Sha-
piro CA, Tarkalson DD, Walters DT (2009) High-yielding
corn response to applied phosphorus, potassium, and sulfur in
Nebraska. Agron J 101:546–555. https:// doi. org/ 10. 2134/ agron
j2008. 0103x
Xiang T, Malik TH, Nielsen K (2020) The impact of population pres-
sure on global fertiliser use intensity, 1970–2011: an analysis
of policy-induced mediation. Technol Forecast Soc Change
152:119895. https:// doi. org/ 10. 1016/j. techf ore. 2019. 119895
Xiukang W, Fan J, Xing Y, Xu G, Wang H, Deng J, Wang Y, Zhang F,
Li P, Li Z (2019) The effects of mulch and nitrogen fertilizer on
the soil environment of crop plants. Advan Agron 153:121–173.
https:// doi. org/ 10. 1016/ bs. agron. 2018. 08. 003
Yadav D (2012) Fertilizer marketing in changing environment. Ind J
Fert 8:60–77
Yao Z, Zheng X, Dong H, Wang R, Mei B, Zhu J (2012) A 3-year
record of N2O and CH4 emissions from a sandy loam paddy
during rice seasons as affected by different nitrogen application
rates. Agric Ecosyst Environ 152:1–9. https:// doi. org/ 10. 1016/j.
agee. 2012. 02. 004
Zargar Shooshtari F, Souri MK, Hasandokht MR, Jari SK (2020)
Glycine mitigates fertilizer requirements of agricultural crops:

Journal of Soil Science and Plant Nutrition
1 3
case study with cucumber as a high fertilizer demanding crop.
Chem Biol Technol Agricul 7:1–10. https:// doi. org/ 10. 1186/
s40538- 020- 00185-5
Zhan A, Zou C, Ye Y, Liu Z, Cui Z, Chen X (2016) Estimating on-
farm wheat yield response to potassium and potassium uptake
requirement in China. Field Crop Res 191:13–19. https:// doi. org/
10. 1016/j. fcr. 2016. 04. 001
Zhong Y, Wang X, Yang J, Zhao X, Ye X (2016) Exploring a suitable
nitrogen fertilizer ra te to reduce greenhouse gas emissions and
ensure rice yields in paddy fields. Sci Total Environ 565:420–
426. https:// doi. org/ 10. 1016/j. scito tenv. 2016. 04. 167
Publisher’s Note Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to
jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
Springer Nature or its licensor (e.g. a society or other partner) holds
exclusive rights to this article under a publishing agreement with the
author(s) or other rightsholder(s); author self-archiving of the accepted
manuscript version of this article is solely governed by the terms of
such publishing agreement and applicable law.
Authors and Aliations
TahirSheikh1 · ZahoorBaba2· ZahoorA.Ganie3· BasharatHamid2· AliMohdYatoo4· AnsarulHaq5· SadafIqbal1·
FehimJ.Wani6· SivagamyKannan7· RoheelaAhmad8
Zahoor Baba
baba.zahoor@gmail.com
1 Division ofAgronomy, FoA, Sher-E-Kashmir University
ofAgricultural Sciences andTechnology Kashmir-Wadura,
Sopore, India193201
2 Division ofBasic Science, FoA, Sher-E-Kashmir University
ofAgricultural Sciences andTechnology Kashmir-Wadura,
Sopore, India193201
3 Stine Research Center, FMC Corporation, Newark, DE, USA
4 Department ofEnvironmental Sciences, University
ofKashmir, Kashmir, India190001
5 Division ofAgronomy, Sher-E-Kashmir University
ofAgricultural Sciences andTechnology Kashmir-Wadura,
Sopore, India193201
6 Division ofAgricultural Economics & Statistics, FoA,
Sher-E-Kashmir University ofAgricultural Sciences
andTechnology Kashmir-Wadura, Sopore, India193201
7 ICAR KVK, Tirur, Tamil Nadu Agricultural University,
Coimbatore, India641001
8 Division ofSoil Science & Agricultural Chemistry, FoA,
Sher-E-Kashmir University ofAgricultural Sciences
andTechnology Kashmir-Wadura, Sopore, India193201